Timur, I agree 11EV is not bad, but the recent batch of X class with smaller sensors averages around 11.5, so the hypotetical X10-Sony might reach 12.

That would be the Panasonic LX7 I guess. But the higher dynamic range at ​lower​ ISO (than the X10) comes at the cost of ​lower​ dynamic range at equal/higher ISO. With current sensor tech it's still a trade-off between these two, either better low ISO dr or better high ISO dr. And the X10 can best the 11.5 EV of the LX7 by the use of EXR DR, at a cost of lower resolution and more noise in the highlights.

Not to mention that it can improve its already better noise/dr at higher ISO via EXR SN. Yes I wrote "/dr", because lower noise means wider dynamic range towards the shadows without having to increase exposure time!

All trade-offs, and that's how it's likely gonna be with the X20. The ISO 400-1250 images I have seen don't look like being less noisy to me. I mentioned that in another thread already: I wouldn't wonder if the same sensor as in the X10 (later revision) was used, just with another filter array in front of it. So pretending like the X10 does not deliver good results for its size and age and hoping that the X20 is miraculously best it out of the pond is far fetched from my point of view (pun intended).

Don't get me wrong, I always prefer to get a better sensor without the EXR witchcraft and all it's idiosyncrasies. And I exchanged my fair share of headbutts with Fujifilm until they told me to return the camera for a refund instead of them fixing the reproducible bugs. I kept the X10, because I don't see any current camera in that weight-class to successfully compete with it when you want it all (DR, noise, lens, size, maybe even hot-shoe and viewfinder). I can take the X10 into a dark theater to (very) silently take photos of the lit on-stage performance without disturbing the audience with light (VF) and clicks (shutter) while having quite many options to tame the light (SN, DR, Pro Low Light).

But the bare DR is not all. The issue is what one can do with a wide-DR raw file conveniently. For instance, my old D90 also does roughly 12EV. But you *never* see them at once in Nikon's ViewNX... and I'm not keen on doing pseudo-HDR since LR4 came around.

LR4 allows to push and pull the extremes very easily and conveniently. Ironically LR4 works a lot better with 6 MP EXR (DR/SN) files than with 12 MP files, because the 6 MP images use a standard Bayer array with just a very little offset between the half-images.

I feel like I have to put this in every thread. Here is my comparison of the X10 (old sensor) at ISO 100 + EXR DR 400 versus the Olympus E-M5 at base ISO (no DR magic). Both shot in raw and then pushed and pulled to extremes in LR4. In the shadows the X10 at 6 mp beats the E-M5 at 16 mp in noise and thus even in resolution/detail. In the mids and highlights the E-M5 wins, but had I used the new sensor the twigs in the X10's highlights would have been blown away less. This is about ​handheld​ performance, you can always get better than EXR DR by using a tripod and bracketing with the E-M5.